Archbishop of Bologna bans Eucharist by hand in select Churches

[Supercatholic]

Communion in the hand is not intrinsically evil, but to me, seeing it is as awkward as seeing your dad walk down the beach with shorts, dress shoes and black socks.

 

[jazzbass981]

Supercatholic, that was an outstanding response!

 

[LilyM]

Communion in the hand is not intrinsically evil, but to me, seeing it is as awkward as seeing your dad walk down the beach with shorts, dress shoes and black socks.

That analogy should be properly turned around to be totally apt - ‘as awkward as turning up to a black tie dinner in bathers’ or something.

Well, I’m sorry it makes you feel awkward.

Prayers and hymns in Latin make me feel awkward, since it’s not my first language and I’ve never formally studied it. I’d never dream of using my personal feelings as an argument *against/I the use of Latin in our public prayer though. In fact I’d never even think that they are worth mentioning in such a situation.

As I’ve been told so often, Mass isn’t really about our feelings after all.*

 

[Sancto_Spiritu]

That analogy should be properly turned around to be totally apt - ‘as awkward as turning up to a black tie dinner in bathers’ or something.

Well, I’m sorry it makes you feel awkward.

Prayers and hymns in Latin make me feel awkward, since it’s not my first language and I’ve never formally studied it. I’d never dream of using my personal feelings as an argument against

Communion in the hand is not intrinsically evil, but it is intrinsically disrespectful.

No matter what you say, Lily, you are wrong. Communion in the hand is disrespectful.

You can sweet talk us and sugar-coat things until the cows come home, but you’re wrong, plain and simple.

 

[Cecilianus]

So CITH is not intrinsically evil, yet in the next breath you call it a profanation. Meaning that every single person who receives CITH in fact commits the mortal sin of profanation of the Blessed Sacrament? In what parallel universe does that not make CITH in fact intrinsically evil?

There are degrees of profanation. Here is an example which is definitely worse than what we are talking about now: a Protestant in mortal sin goes to a Catholic Church and receives Communion (or pockets it, if he happens to be from Canada ). This is certainly a grave profanation of the Sacrament - and the one who commits it “eats and drinks condemnation unto himself”. Yet who would seriously treat that kind of desecration of the Sacrament on the same level as, for example, a Black Mass?

I’m not suggesting that receiving Communion in the hand is a mortal sin (I gave an example of different degrees of profanation - the principle is what I am trying to show; I’m not claiming that Communion in the hand by a believing Catholic in the state of grace is this bad), but it is a profanation of the Sacrament.

 

[ncjohn]

Communion in the hand is not intrinsically evil, but it is intrinsically disrespectful.

That is so laughable I can barely restrain myself. Can you possibly truly believe this? The Church certainly doesn’t. The reasons for it even being stopped to begin with were practical reasons, not any matter of it being intrinsically wrong.

The ENTIRE early Church, including countless saints and martyrs, received in the hand, as have countless numbers of Catholics since.

I absolutely guarantee you that I can respectfully and reverently receive communion in the hand every bit as easily as on the tongue.

Peace,

 

[Sancto_Spiritu]

That is so laughable I can barely restrain myself. Can you possibly truly believe this? The Church certainly doesn’t. The reasons for it even being stopped to begin with were practical reasons, not any matter of it being intrinsically wrong.

The ENTIRE early Church, including countless saints and martyrs, received in the hand, as have countless numbers of Catholics since.

I absolutely guarantee you that I can respectfully and reverently receive communion in the hand every bit as easily as on the tongue.

Peace,

The Pope agrees with you! Oh wait…

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/arco_diary/pictures/Pope Communion.jpg

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

If the entire early Church jumped off a bridge, would you?

Justifying anything with the argument “the early Church did it” is dumb. That’s because the Church changes over time. Things change in 2,000 years. Now, we possess a deeper theological and technological ability to understand the essence of the Blessed Sacrament, and protect it.

Also, where did I say it was intrinsically wrong? Your straw men are so laughable I can barely contain myself!

 

[NeedImprovement]

There are degrees of profanation. Here is an example which is definitely worse than what we are talking about now: a Protestant in mortal sin goes to a Catholic Church and receives Communion (or pockets it, if he happens to be from Canada ). This is certainly a grave profanation of the Sacrament - and the one who commits it “eats and drinks condemnation unto himself”. Yet who would seriously treat that kind of desecration of the Sacrament on the same level as, for example, a Black Mass?
…

I’m sorry…… I’ve scrolled through all 10 pages of posts and I wasn’t able to find a reference to Canadians pocketing consecrated Hosts which might actually grant the above quote some semblance of a joke…Could someone please direct me to it or explain it to me

 

[ncjohn]

The Pope agrees with you! Oh wait…

What the Pope chooses to do in his private Masses is irrelevant to the topic. The Church cannot authorize things that will lead us into impiety. Unless and until he revokes the indult it can be assumed he doesn’t find it to be “intrinsically disrespectful”. Of course if you have something where he has said that it is I’d love to see that. But then he has distributed communion in the hand many times through the years.

Justifying anything with the argument “the early Church did it” is dumb.

Oh really? Using the term “intrinsically”–defined as “objectively”–when it was the NORM of the early Church is dumb. And it wasn’t just the early Church; it was allowed for centuries. It is still the norm for some Eastern Catholic churches. If something was the norm for a good part of the Church’s history and was different for another part, it CANNOT be “intrinsically” or “objectively” disrespectful by definition. It is a discipline within the Church and the Church is allowed to change its disciplines.

That’s because the Church changes over time. Things change in 2,000 years. Now, we possess a deeper theological and technological ability to understand the essence of the Blessed Sacrament, and protect it.

Which is a great argument in favor of it if the Church has found it to be acceptable again. Doesn’t work so well to support your argument though. I venture to guess that those martyrs who died for their faith had a pretty darn good understanding of that essence and how handling it unworthily would “bring condemnation” on them (from a guy way back when named St. Paul).

Also, where did I say it was intrinsically wrong? Your straw men are so laughable I can barely contain myself!

Wow, you have such a short memory. It was in the very quote I responded to from you and to which you are responding. I quoted and responded to your statement that it was intrinsically “disrespectful”.
Sancto Spiritu:

Communion in the hand is not intrinsically evil, but it is intrinsically disrespectful.

Now perhaps you can show me where I said you said it was intrinsically “wrong”? I responded that I could receive it as respectfully in the hand as on the tongue.

I personally don’t care which way I receive and tend to follow whatever the norm is in the parish I happen to be attending. If it goes back to 100% on the tongue tomorrow that’s fine with me; it’s what I grew up with pre-Vatican II and it never bothered me. But I can tell you first hand from serving at lots and lots of TLM’s at that time that the same glazed-over look was on the faces of many then as there is now. Respect and reverence don’t come from you you receive; they come from how you perceive.

Peace,

 

[ncjohn]

If the entire early Church jumped off a bridge, would you?

Re-reading your post I found this question intriguing. If the early Church all jumped off a bridge because they were called to do so rather than renounce their faith, and the Church found that to be virtuous, I might do so if the occasion arose.

I daresay that the early Christians were FAR more in touch with their faith and took it far more seriously than the overwhelming majority of Christians today. Most of us can’t even take the “persecution” of allowing that someone else might prefer to attend Mass in a different language than us much less consider giving up our lives for the faith.

Point is though that if the entire early Church found something virtuous and acceptable it cannot cease to be so now. It may not be the best practice for current times and may not reflect a fuller understanding we might have now, but if it wasn’t intrinsically wrong or disrespectful then, it can’t be now.

Peace,

 

[holy_moly]

What the Pope chooses to do in his private Masses is irrelevant to the topic. The Church cannot authorize things that will lead us into impiety. Unless and until he revokes the indult it can be assumed he doesn’t find it to be “intrinsically disrespectful”. Of course if you have something where he has said that it is I’d love to see that. But then he has distributed communion in the hand many times through the years.

Oh really? Using the term “intrinsically”–defined as “objectively”–when it was the NORM of the early Church is dumb. And it wasn’t just the early Church; it was allowed for centuries. It is still the norm for some Eastern Catholic churches. If something was the norm for a good part of the Church’s history and was different for another part, it CANNOT be “intrinsically” or “objectively” disrespectful by definition. It is a discipline within the Church and the Church is allowed to change its disciplines.

Which is a great argument in favor of it if the Church has found it to be acceptable again. Doesn’t work so well to support your argument though. I venture to guess that those martyrs who died for their faith had a pretty darn good understanding of that essence and how handling it unworthily would “bring condemnation” on them (from a guy way back when named St. Paul).

Wow, you have such a short memory. It was in the very quote I responded to from you and to which you are responding. I quoted and responded to your statement that it was intrinsically “disrespectful”.

Now perhaps you can show me where I said you said it was intrinsically “wrong”? I responded that I could receive it as respectfully in the hand as on the tongue.

I personally don’t care which way I receive and tend to follow whatever the norm is in the parish I happen to be attending. If it goes back to 100% on the tongue tomorrow that’s fine with me; it’s what I grew up with pre-Vatican II and it never bothered me. But I can tell you first hand from serving at lots and lots of TLM’s at that time that the same glazed-over look was on the faces of many then as there is now. Respect and reverence don’t come from you you receive; they come from how you perceive.

Peace,

This post makes more sense than any other on this subject. I too receive according to the norm of where I’m at. What I don’t understand is all the emotionalism against receiving in the hand. To me it seems judgmental, scrupulous & a waste of time.

 

[Cecilianus]

I’m sorry…… I’ve scrolled through all 10 pages of posts and I wasn’t able to find a reference to Canadians pocketing consecrated Hosts which might actually grant the above quote some semblance of a joke…Could someone please direct me to it or explain it to me

The Canadian prime minister (a Protestant) was recently videotaped receiving Communion in the hand at a Catholic Mass and pocketing it instead of eating it. It was in the news; I assumed that people had heard the story.

 

[NeedImprovement]

The Canadian prime minister (a Protestant) was recently videotaped receiving Communion in the hand at a Catholic Mass and pocketing it instead of eating it. It was in the news; I assumed that people had heard the story.

Thanks Cecilianus - Yes I had heard, but was looking for the connection in the thread :doh2:

I hadn’t seen the video - only heard the report on the radio.
(views video)

They’re now claiming he consumed it … but the video is inconclusive. He didn’t actually go up to receive Communion. Rather it appears the Bishop went along the front row distributing Communion. Some speculate he held out his hand thinking he would receive a handshake from the bishop…who knows (He gets a lot of that you know ) Anyhow both of them should’ve known better .

Back on topic:

At St. Joseph’s Oratory here in Montreal (big tourist attraction) they encounter a similar problem to the one which concerns the Archbishop of Bologna. A significant cross section of non Catholics go up and receive Communion in the hand and try and walk away with it.

Once on the way to Communion , I saw a little girl perhaps 6 or 7 years old exclaim excitedly to her mother on the way to Communion, "Are we gonna steal it mama…Are we gonna steal it!!? The mother, embarrassed, replied, “Shhh! Shhh.”

At that particular venue, I’ve had to stop people who were leaving with the host on several occasions and ask them to consume it…a terrible feeling when you see it and a terrible distraction too from my own reception of Communion.

Sometimes these hosts are stolen to be desecrated at a black mass. And people get a good price for stolen consecrated Hosts, according to my spiritual director …Jesus is being sold again for 30 pieces of silver.

Some of our fellow members might be somewhat aloof as to what exactly goes on with the Host during a black mass…better to stay that way. What happens would make your hair stand up, and it isn’t something that can be posted in these forums; no matter how politely one words it.

 

[rjs1]

What the Pope chooses to do in his private Masses is irrelevant to the topic.

Again on CAF I find people saying that what the Pope does is irrelevant!

How appallingly disrespectful of our supreme pastor.

The masses to which I referred during World Youth Day here is Sydney were absolutely NOT private masses. That is a ridiculous comment. They were as public as you can get. They had congregations of hundreds of thousands, they were televised worldwide.

I find it insulting that you would dismiss what the Holy Father required, of those who receive Holy Communion from him, as irrelevant. He obviously would be fully aware that the whole world would be watching how he preferred Communion to be recieved.

If you want to disagree with the Pope, go ahead, but do not dismiss his preferences as irrelevant.

 

[holy_moly]

Thanks Cecilianus - Yes I had heard, but was looking for the connection in the thread :doh2:

I hadn’t seen the video - only heard the report on the radio.
(views video)

They’re now claiming he consumed it … but the video is inconclusive. He didn’t actually go up to receive Communion. Rather it appears the Bishop went along the front row distributing Communion. Some speculate he held out his hand thinking he would receive a handshake from the bishop…who knows (He gets a lot of that you know ) Anyhow both of them should’ve known better .

Back on topic:

At St. Joseph’s Oratory here in Montreal (big tourist attraction) they encounter a similar problem to the one which concerns the Archbishop of Bologna. A significant cross section of non Catholics go up and receive Communion in the hand and try and walk away with it.

Once on the way to Communion , I saw a little girl perhaps 6 or 7 years old exclaim excitedly to her mother on the way to Communion, "Are we gonna steal it mama…Are we gonna steal it!!? The mother, embarrassed, replied, “Shhh! Shhh.”

At that particular venue, I’ve had to stop people who were leaving with the host on several occasions and ask them to consume it…a terrible feeling when you see it and a terrible distraction too from my own reception of Communion.

Sometimes these hosts are stolen to be desecrated at a black mass. And people get a good price for stolen consecrated Hosts, according to my spiritual director …Jesus is being sold again for 30 pieces of silver.

Some of our fellow members might be somewhat aloof as to what exactly goes on with the Host during a black mass…better to stay that way. What happens would make your hair stand up, and it isn’t something that can be posted in these forums; no matter how politely one words it.

When my daughter was 2, I was holding her in my arms as I received the Blessed Sacrament (by mouth); she instinctively reached out her hand and the priest ( a Fransiscan) gave her Holy Communion! She had it in her mouth in no time- I was speechless! Anyone ever hear of a Priest deliberately doing this to one so young?

 

[pipper]

Again on CAF I find people saying that what the Pope does is irrelevant!

How appallingly disrespectful of our supreme pastor.

The masses to which I referred during World Youth Day here is Sydney were absolutely NOT private masses. That is a ridiculous comment. They were as public as you can get. They had congregations of hundreds of thousands, they were televised worldwide.

I find it insulting that you would dismiss what the Holy Father required, of those who receive Holy Communion from him, as irrelevant. He obviously would be fully aware that the whole world would be watching how he preferred Communion to be recieved.

If you want to disagree with the Pope, go ahead, but do not dismiss his preferences as irrelevant.

How appalingly disrespectfull of the disabled!

I guess if I ever get to Rome or a Papal Mass elsewhere I could never recieve from the Holy Father, for you see like hundreds of thousands of my fellow Catholics I am disabled and could not kneel to save my life. I have seen at least one other poster who indicated that she cannot kneel either, or if she got down she could never get back up.

Of course she was shut-out, ignored as I am sure I will be too. All you traditionalists will be glad to hear that I always recieve on the tougue. With my Parinsons I would probably drop the sacred Host causing what would be a true irrevevrence.

 

[Cecilianus]

When my daughter was 2, I was holding her in my arms as I received the Blessed Sacrament (by mouth); she instinctively reached out her hand and the priest ( a Fransiscan) gave her Holy Communion! She had it in her mouth in no time- I was speechless! Anyone ever hear of a Priest deliberately doing this to one so young?

Yes - but only in the Byzantine rite, where all infants are confirmed and receive their first Communion immediately after Baptism, as they have since time immemorial. But the Franciscan should have known better.

 

[Cecilianus]

How appalingly disrespectfull of the disabled!

I guess if I ever get to Rome or a Papal Mass elsewhere I could never recieve from the Holy Father, for you see like hundreds of thousands of my fellow Catholics I am disabled and could not kneel to save my life. I have seen at least one other poster who indicated that she cannot kneel either, or if she got down she could never get back up.

Of course she was shut-out, ignored as I am sure I will be too. All you traditionalists will be glad to hear that I always recieve on the tougue. With my Parinsons I would probably drop the sacred Host causing what would be a true irrevevrence.

Are you seriously suggesting that the entire body of the faithful act disabled? When disabled people are present we accomodate them as necessary - in every parish I have been to on a regular basis the priest has administered Communion to the elderly disabled sitting in the front row of the Church before going to the line forming in the aisle, and this would be no different than in traditional parishes. And traditional priests still do visit shut-ins - as novus ordo priests do not. My ill and disabled mother - who had not attended Mass in almost a year during the longest stretch - was never visited by a (NO) priest even though he was perfectly well aware of her condition.

 

[rjs1]

How appalingly disrespectfull of the disabled!

I guess if I ever get to Rome or a Papal Mass elsewhere I could never recieve from the Holy Father, for you see like hundreds of thousands of my fellow Catholics I am disabled and could not kneel to save my life. I have seen at least one other poster who indicated that she cannot kneel either, or if she got down she could never get back up.

Of course she was shut-out, ignored as I am sure I will be too. All you traditionalists will be glad to hear that I always recieve on the tougue. With my Parinsons I would probably drop the sacred Host causing what would be a true irrevevrence.

I know of no “traditionalist” as you call them, who would insist that a disabled persom kneel if it is difficult for them to do so.

I have no idea what your comment has to do with my post, because I was naturally talking about the common situation and would never presume to make the disabled suffer.

In fact in my sometimes duties as an usher at my Church we always make sure the disabled are receive Holy Communion by the priest (or EMHC) going to them, we never cause them any discomfort or difficulty.

Please do not be so dismissive of “traditionalists”.

 

[Frosty]

And traditional priests still do visit shut-ins - as novus ordo priests do not. .

That statement is absolutely false. This statement, like so many others of this type made on this forum by people who claim to be “traditional” Catholics really makes me wonder if it is now “traditional” to disregard the eighth commandment. It surely often seems that the precepts of that commandment are taken extremely lightly.

2464 The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our relations with others. This moral prescription flows from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is the truth and wills the truth. Offenses against the truth express by word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral uprightness: they are fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the foundations of the covenant

You might care to take the time to go to the link below and read what the CCC has to say regarding the eighth commandment.